Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Washington Post Column: Why the assault weapons ban is (probably) going nowhere
Washington Post ^ | 01/29/2013 | Aaron Blake

Posted on 01/29/2013 12:31:18 PM PST by SeekAndFind

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced a new version of the assault weapons ban on Thursday.

And it’s already looking like a lost cause.

Most everyone agrees that the ban is the most ambitious and politically difficult item on President Obama’s and Vice President Biden’s gun control agenda. And there is increasing evidence that it will be cast aside in favor or more doable proposals. Below, we look at four reasons why.

1. Joe Biden is downplaying it

The same day that Feinstein introduced the bill, Biden suggested that magazine sizes were the most important part of a gun control package. ”I’m much less concerned, quite frankly, about what you call an assault weapon than I am about magazines and the number of rounds that can be held in a magazine,” Biden said in a Google Hangout. He added that “more people out there get shot with a Glock that has cartridges in a (high-capacity magazine)” and also suggested that shotguns are more deadly than so-called assault weapons. Biden then again downplayed the ban again during a two-hour roundtable discussion on Friday.

This, we remind you, is all within 24 hours of the assault weapons ban being introduced by a Democratic senator. And Biden is already giving us reasons why it’s not that big a deal.

Biden is the point man on all of this. His words matter, and he’s quite aware of the current politics of his issue. The fact that he’s downplaying the assault weapons ban suggests that it’s not likely to happen and he doesn’t want the whole thing to be viewed as a failure if the ban isn’t passed.

2. The votes aren’t there

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: 113th; assaultweapons; awb; banglist; bho44; guncontrol; nocompromise; secondamendment; youwillnotdisarmus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 01/29/2013 12:31:24 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

FROM HOTAIR:

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/29/wapo-assault-weapons-ban-is-probably-doa/

NBC read the writing on the wall, too:

Getting an outright ban through a divided Congress in the face of opposition from the National Rifle Association and other groups is unlikely, and the fight is likely to focus on other measures, like the background checks and limits on magazine size.

Biden’s comments came hours after Senate Democrats, led by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, displayed various assault weapons at a Capitol Hill press conference. Feinstein introduced legislation Thursday to ban 158 specific types of those guns.


2 posted on 01/29/2013 12:32:48 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

SEE ALSO HERE:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-25/assault-weapons-ban-lacks-democratic-votes-to-pass-senate.html

TITLE:

Assault Weapons Ban Lacks Democratic Votes to Pass Senate


3 posted on 01/29/2013 12:33:29 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
These so-called assault rifles that everyone is screaming about is just of a different design of past weapons but are still...one pull=one bullet.

People (mostly women) think they're friggin' machine guns...'cuz they saw 3 minutes of Rambo!!

4 posted on 01/29/2013 12:35:19 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Never underestimate the cowardice of the GOP.


5 posted on 01/29/2013 12:40:59 PM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
It's unlikely the Democrats would buy into a prohibition on illegal aliens owning, possessing or using firearms ~ particularly if that were dressed out as a FELONY.

To get a head start on the Democrats I'd be introducing such a bill in the House of Representatives right now ~ get them to VOTE DOWN THE FIRST GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION BROUGHT TO A VOTE AFTER NEWTOWN.

NOTE: Peeps who are here without the specific consent of the United States are here unlawfully, so it's like they really aren't here ~ no visa, no visita ~ so they wouldn't be covered under the Second.

6 posted on 01/29/2013 12:43:32 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I hate to spoil their fun but my bet is that Di Fi goes 0 for 3 on this one.


7 posted on 01/29/2013 12:43:48 PM PST by technically right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: technically right

Folks, the DiFi bill wasn’t intended to “go anywhere”.

It was intended to be the most egregious piece of infringement possible in order to get you to accept the “compromise bill” that’s coming.


8 posted on 01/29/2013 12:46:29 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MrB

maybe, but DiFi obsesses day and night about firearms. She wouldn’t pass a mental fitness test these days ~ no dealer would sell that nutcase a firearm.


9 posted on 01/29/2013 12:48:08 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FReepers
In 1941, U.S. Attorney General Robert Jackson called on Congress to enact national registration of all firearms. Given events in Europe, Congress recoiled, and legislation was introduced to protect the Second Amendment. Rep. Edwin Arthur Hall explained: "Before the advent of Hitler or Stalin, who took power from the German and Russian people, measures were thrust upon the free legislatures of those countries to deprive the people of the possession and use of firearms, so that they could not resist the encroachments of such diabolical and vitriolic state police organizations as the Gestapo, the Ogpu, and the Cheka."


Click The Pic To Donate

Rep. John W. Patman added: "The people have a right to keep arms; therefore, if we should have some Executive who attempted to set himself up as dictator or king, the people can organize themselves together and, with the arms and ammunition they have, they can properly protect themselves. . . ."


10 posted on 01/29/2013 12:49:03 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (My faith and politics cannot be separated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This only means that we need to be carefully waching what the other hand is doing. It’s a common tactic for the left to throw something outrageous out there so that while people are focussing on that, they can quietly get on with the business of passing other, less “controversial” legislation, such as a national database, or other “bureaucratic” sounding legislation. Later on, when the frog (the American people) have become used to the temperature turned up one more degree, out they come again with the other stuff. They never stop, they never give in, they only stall for time and take one step backwards in order to to take 3 steps forward later after all the attention has gone elsewhere. Just look how they’ve managed things exactly that way with amnesty and the sodomite agenda.


11 posted on 01/29/2013 12:49:40 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Bingo!


12 posted on 01/29/2013 12:50:37 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“While there was arguably more impetus for gun control after Newtown than there has been in years,...”

Yeah, by the media. Talk about astroturf.


13 posted on 01/29/2013 12:51:19 PM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Universal background checks are unacceptable, too. It is noting more than a way for the government to fill in the gaps of their illegal database.


14 posted on 01/29/2013 12:51:53 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (There is no requirement to show need in order to exercise your rights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Or their ability to yank a defeat out of victory!


15 posted on 01/29/2013 12:52:58 PM PST by Little Ray (Waiting for the return of the Gods of the Copybook Headings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MrB
It was intended to be the most egregious piece of infringement possible in order to get you to accept the “compromise bill” that’s coming.

This is the perspective we all need to start from and clearly state to any and all who will listen (Senators, Reps, NRA, etc.) that NO COMPROMISE is acceptable because it only encourages them to come back later. Everything about DiFi's bill is egregious and needs to go down in flames.

16 posted on 01/29/2013 12:54:17 PM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

Victory, or any form thereof, musr be avoided at all costs.


17 posted on 01/29/2013 12:56:52 PM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

It’s time to not accept any of the left’s “reasonable gun control” rhetoric.

We don’t care if you think this is “reasonable”. We know your goal is a total ban on privately owned firearms, and we’re not going to let you “incremental” us into it.

GTH.


18 posted on 01/29/2013 12:58:05 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Don’t worry, it’ll never pass the House. - Oct 09
Don’t worry, it’ll never pass the Senate. - Dec 09
Don’t worry, it’ll never pass the Congress. - Mar 10
Don’t worry, the Courts will never uphold it. - June 12

- The smartest people in the room discussing Obamacare.....


19 posted on 01/29/2013 12:59:53 PM PST by Tzimisce (The American Revolution began when the British attempted to disarm the Colonists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

This is a good argument for why there should be no more compromises AT ALL - EVER: http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html


20 posted on 01/29/2013 1:03:19 PM PST by Ancesthntr (Banning guns to prevent crime is like banning cars to prevent drunk driving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson